We welcome your constructive comments in The Nation on May 3 and wish to offer our response as follows: Thailand's insider trading law has been in use for some 15 years. The interpretation that we applied to Miss Yingluck's case had to be the same as used in all other previous cases. However, each of the cases that we had previously prosecuted had its own different fact, which made it too simplistic to compare just the outcome. As we have explained, under the current law, the mere facts that the insider 1) possessed material inside information, and 2) traded shares before such information became public are, by themselves, not enough for prosecution.

Is this the same in other jurisdictions? In some (EU directives, Germany, etc), they are the same as Thailand's. In these countries, the use of information is still an element that needs to be proved. However, in many other jurisdictions (the UK, Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore, etc), they are not.

Should Thailand change its law to be more rigorous? We are right now studying the possibility of amending all aspects of our insider trading law. We will therefore open a public debate to determine what should be the right balance between investor protection and the right to buy and sell securities in good faith.

Thirachai Phuvanatnaranubala

Secretary-General

Corporate Affairs Department

------------------------------------------------

An alternative source of fuel for motorists

Re: "Possible paranormal activity ignored in 'Lemon' story", Letters, May 7.

I agree with Constance Beasley about offering the ghost in the engine some fruit; however, if it were me, I would offer durian rather than mangosteen. My reasoning being that it is possible that the ghost might emerge, eat the fruit and return to the engine of the car. If that should happen, with durian, at least the lady will get some free gas from the effort. 

John Arnone

Yasothon

----------------------------------

Does the Burmese junta follow a Thai example?

Re: "Salvaging the future of democracy in Thailand", Opinion, May 7.

I agree with Kavi Chongkittavorn in his "Regional Perspective" column that it is unfair to portray the situation in Thailand as moving towards that of Burma.

Actually, Thailand is the role model for the Burmese military junta.The Thai "Axis of Oppression", the aristocracy, the Army and business interests, have ruled Thailand for most of the seventy years since the overthrow of the absolute monarchy; the Burmese junta have held power for less than half that time.

Dom Dunn

London

-----------------------------------

There's no right to protection against being offended

I took a recent vacation to Bangkok, and I must admit, I love your country. The people are very respectful, and very kind. Before I came to Thailand, I had never even heard of His Majesty the King, and without even knowing anything about him, I could tell he was a very good person by the sheer amount of respect he received.

I strongly believe that as a sovereign nation, your country is entirely entitled to its beliefs and ways of dealing with issues.

What I am writing for, however, is to help you understand what some Americans believe, because I notice that you might have missed some points about the freedom of speech philosophy.

Freedom of speech comes with responsibilities and this is entirely true. However, those responsibilities are the same underlying responsibilities for all freedoms - the philosophy that "your personal freedoms end when they infringe on my rights".

Shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre is illegal and not protected for the sole reason that it could cause bodily harm. People in a rush to the exit will trample over others. The responsibility primarily being, your speech must not physically harm anyone, or threaten to harm anyone illegally. One has the right to be safe from bodily harm. One does not have the right to be safe from being offended.

The Pope has been satirised in several TV shows on American stations. Even God, the Christian God, in a Christian nation, is mocked and satirised. How can you possibly expect a culture to respect a foreign monarch they barely know, any more than they respect their own God?

Is it right to mock someone as kind and generous as the Thai King? Certainly not. But many Americans who believe in freedom of speech also do not believe it is right to censor someone's beliefs or expression.

America was founded on a rebellion against a monarchy. It is deeply ingrained in our culture to question authority, and to require respect to be earned.

All I ask of the Thai people is this: please try to understand our culture, and understand that not all Americans are disrespectful. Culture is not an excuse for disrespect, but it is the best explanation I can give you on why it happens.

I too find it entirely hypocritical of Google to aid China in censorship and then refuse to do the same for Thailand. While a strong opponent of censorship, double standards are something I oppose even more strongly.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and long live the King.

Brett Allen

USA

-------------------------------

BOT must be kept free of government interference

I respectfully disagree with Khun Pannee Stawarodom, director-general, Fiscal Policy Office, Ministry of Finance (MOF), who insists that the finance minister keep his right to approve/fire the Bank of Thailand (BOT) governor. She says that since the finance minister is responsible for the economy, the BOT must be under his command. But if so, the other economic-related bodies, eg. the Ministry of Commerce, should be under the MOF as well.

She says that coordination among policy makers is, in effect, more important than regulatory independence. But, surely, the director-general knows that there are other ways to assure coordination, so we can have both coordination and BOT independence.

Also, nobody is proposing that the BOT be completely independent; it will still be accountable to the Senate. The problem with having the BOT under the finance minister is that pre-Thaksin, few, if any, elected Cabinets served out their full terms. So, ministers had to focus on the short-run, often to the country's detriment. Ensuring the BOT's independence, with accountability, frees it to do what is best for the country as a whole in the long-term, even though the ruling party of the day may not like it.

Perhaps Khun Pannee wants the BOT under the MOF because she is unhappy with the BOT's capital controls. The BOT has laid no claims to infallibility. If Khun Pannee wants the BOT's actions modified or nullified, she should discuss the matter with the BOT governor and the finance minister. Changing the method of selection because you're unhappy with what the incumbent did is like throwing out democracy because you think the winner's doing a poor job.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

-----------------------------------------

Thai police procedures a cause for suspicion

Re: "Police seek hotel driver after staffer feared dead", News, March 30.

It does seem that the Thai police work very differently from other forces around the world. If I were the suspect - named in full along with his age - in this case, I may have read your report about the police suspicions and would by now be putting as many kilometres between me and the police, and the Novotel Bang-Na as possible.

So far, as your report makes clear, no body of the missing female financial officer has been found, nor is there any sign of the missing Bt400,000 of the hotel's money. Police are now seeking any witness who may have seen the lady and the suspect in a car together. It is helpful to know the thrust of their investigations - helpful to the culprit, who of course may also read newspapers. More confusingly, if this were possible, you report that the suspect went with his wife to see the police and give information voluntarily before, unsurprisingly, disappearing.

Call me ingenuous (please!), but can you answer me the following:

a) If any evidence against this man existed when he went to the police station voluntarily, why was he not arrested then?

b) Why have the police released many cogent details - and their prime suspicions - to the press while the man is on the loose? Do they actually think he will meekly give himself up on reading this, rather than hitching a lift to Nakhon Nowhere?

c) Have the police considered that if the man is arrested, tried and found not guilty, that he could sue them for millions of baht for defamation?

Oh, and one more thing: Why, please enlighten us, do so many suspects "show up" at police stations the moment they learn that an arrest warrant may be issued against them? Around the rest of the real world, real suspects are far too busy making miles, or alibis.

David Hardcastle

Chiang Mai

-----------------------------------

Shuttle service needed between Bangkok's airports 

Speaking as someone who travels regularly to Thailand on business, there is one point on the re-opening of Don Muang Airport that has not been made clear: Has a shuttle-bus service been set up to transfer passengers between the two airports for connecting flights? Or is it up to passengers to find their own way by taxi or other transportation?

If no connection service has been provided, it will be unpleasant if harried travellers are victimised with the inflated fares of the usual taxi "mafia" suspects, who for years have been refusing to turn on their meters.

Lewis Gibson

Singapore